Eunbi Kim1, Dong Gyu Choi1. 1. a Department of Ophthalmology , Hallym University College of Medicine , Seoul , South Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare surgical outcomes between bilateral medial rectus recession (BMR) and unilateral medial rectus recession-lateral rectus resection (RR) for infantile esotropia. METHODS: In this retrospective study, BMR was performed on 57 patients (BMR group) and RR on 23 (RR group) for treatment of infantile esotropia with the postoperative follow-up period of 6 months or more. The main outcome measures were angle of esodeviation, rate of surgical success, rate of reoperation, rate of postoperative development of DVD, and postoperative sensory status. Surgical success was defined as esotropia or exotropia of 10 PD or less. RESULTS: The mean preoperative esodeviation at near was 44.1 prism diopters (PD) in BMR, and 40.2 PD in RR (p = 0.161). There was no statistically significant difference in angles of deviation between BMR and RR from postoperative day 1 to final follow-up, respectively (p > 0.05). Whereas until postoperative month 6 the surgical success rate did not significantly differ, from postoperative year 1 to final follow-up it was significantly higher in BMR than in RR (p < 0.05). The final success rates were 80.70% and 56.52% for BMR and RR, respectively (p = 0.047). The reoperation rate, correspondingly, was significantly lower for BMR (17.54%) than for RR (60.78%) (p = 0.000). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the mean postoperative angle of deviation between BMR and RR for infantile esotropia. However, the final success rate was higher (p = 0.047) and the reoperation rate was lower for BMR than for RR (p = 0.000).
PURPOSE: To compare surgical outcomes between bilateral medial rectus recession (BMR) and unilateral medial rectus recession-lateral rectus resection (RR) for infantile esotropia. METHODS: In this retrospective study, BMR was performed on 57 patients (BMR group) and RR on 23 (RR group) for treatment of infantile esotropia with the postoperative follow-up period of 6 months or more. The main outcome measures were angle of esodeviation, rate of surgical success, rate of reoperation, rate of postoperative development of DVD, and postoperative sensory status. Surgical success was defined as esotropia or exotropia of 10 PD or less. RESULTS: The mean preoperative esodeviation at near was 44.1 prism diopters (PD) in BMR, and 40.2 PD in RR (p = 0.161). There was no statistically significant difference in angles of deviation between BMR and RR from postoperative day 1 to final follow-up, respectively (p > 0.05). Whereas until postoperative month 6 the surgical success rate did not significantly differ, from postoperative year 1 to final follow-up it was significantly higher in BMR than in RR (p < 0.05). The final success rates were 80.70% and 56.52% for BMR and RR, respectively (p = 0.047). The reoperation rate, correspondingly, was significantly lower for BMR (17.54%) than for RR (60.78%) (p = 0.000). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the mean postoperative angle of deviation between BMR and RR for infantile esotropia. However, the final success rate was higher (p = 0.047) and the reoperation rate was lower for BMR than for RR (p = 0.000).